A Brazilian nurse practitioner sought to continue work in the U.S. as a nurse practitioner specializing in hospital infection control and burn injury care, proposing to develop infection-control training programs, integrate new technologies, and eventually employ other healthcare professionals.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“she does not explain how her specific work as an individual nurse ... will address a national talent shortage or affect the fields of infection control, bum treatment, or the healthcare industry.”

“neither the Petitioner's professional plan, letters of support, nor other documentation in the record specify how the Petitioner will actualize the vague and overarching concepts that she describes here.”

“the record does not show that benefits to the U.S. regional or national economy resulting from the Petitioner's pursuits as a nurse practitioner reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects"”

“she does not explain how her work will have a positive impact on entities outside of an immediate employer or any individuals to whom she intends to provide medical services.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• business plan · discounted

  “neither the Petitioner's professional plan, letters of support, nor other documentation in the record specify how the Petitioner will actualize the vague and overarching concepts”

  AAO decision text
• recommendation letter · discounted

  “this documentation speaks to the Petitioner's qualifications as a nurse practitioner, it does not address how her intention to work ... will have a national impact.”

  AAO decision text
• resume experience · discounted

  “relate not to the first Dhanasar prong addressing the national importance of a proposed endeavor, but to the second.”

  AAO decision text

Where this case turned

• Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
• Endeavor too vague · p1 — described as a job role, not a defined undertaking
• Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region
• Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar

Notable

The Petitioner, appearing to be self-represented or drafting her own brief, made sweeping and grammatically informal claims (e.g., 'It's not too much to realize that for this I will need to employ several other professionals') about broad economic impact, which the AAO characterized as aspirational and unsupported.

Authorities this decision leans on

From the doctrinal survivor set — 187 authority tests across 47 distinct authorities cleared the differential-lift gates. Only those appear here.

• 8 C.F.R. 103.3
• Flores v. Garland
• Matter of L-A-C-

Cases in adjacent profiles

• The Petitioner, a pharmacist, proposed to work in the United States through her own company providing pharmaceutical reg
• The Petitioner, a Brazilian-trained physiotherapist, proposed to work as a physical therapist and entrepreneur in the Un
• The Petitioner, a resident physician in New York holding a Chinese bachelor of medicine (MBBS) degree found equivalent t
• The Petitioner, a music therapist, proposed to establish and expand music therapy services and community music programs
• The Petitioner, a physical therapist, proposed to work as a physical therapist in the United States while operating his